The Footie Thread

[GB72]

The American franchise and draft model would simply not work here where there is a whole network of clubs rather than simply one league. Players are scouted and ranked from early high school and colleges recruit them based on this. Once at college the NFL teams and analysts scout them for when they are eligible for the draft. 99% of players come through this system - compare that to PL clubs who need scouting networks all over the world. The draft method can encourage poor performance to obtain more valuable picks also.

Not sure I agree with a salary cap - rugby union certainly is a good example of it with the Wasps and Worcester situations and also Saracens cheating it to achieve some of their success. Salary caps seem to work best where the player pool is largely restricted such as US sports or NRL/Super League (even in those there were high profile instances of cheating such as Melbourne Storm)

So the current model of whoever can throw the most money at a club and inflate costs beyond what others can afford is the best way of generating a competitive sporting league. Agree that we do not have the set up for a draft. Salary caps are a better option. Not sure what the issue is with Wasps and Worcester, they spent money they did not have to spend up to the cap. The cap is there to keep some parity in the league not to prevent heinous financial stupidity infortunately. Saracens cheated and were relegated. Can we see the same happening to City if found guilty. No system is foolproof to cheating but the mark of the system is how the cheats are punished.

My thought has always been one to stop wage and transfer inflation without causing massive upset. Set a salary cap of £500000.00 a week (£26 million a year) so it is high enough and have transfer fees set at the remaining salary on the contract with a max of a 5 year contract. That would top the transfer fee at £130 million but that would be for someone who was bought and sold on the same day. Most with a couple of years on teh contract could move for a more reasonable £50 million. All costs and agent fees are paid out of the transfer fee and not over and above.

Maybe those are not the ideal solutions but surely it is getting near time to put something in place to level the spending out across the top leagues so as it returns to being a sporting competition as opposed to being a financial one.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I have to say that the idea of supporting a team in a lower league that has to spend within its means and develop players and who play on a more even playing surface (metaphorically not literally) does appeal. It just seems with each new club sale to a billionaire that it all becomes more of a farce, that sport actually has so little to do with it now. Not sure I would mind all the big boys disappearing off to a European Super League and leave the rest in a more even competition (reminding again that I have no great knowledge of football). I know the fans of those clubs do not want it but what about the fans of the other clubs, would they rather stand a chance in a league without the clubs with multi billionaire owners

Right now and for the last 12 years Liverpool have been working under a self sustaining model , the income it spends is the income the club generates -the owners aren’t dipping into their own pockets to fund anything

Now imo that’s now a club should be run but for some that’s not good enough because it doesn’t allow the club to spend hundreds of millions each season on players

The Prem is now global and the transfer window for some is more exciting the game , the likes of FIFA and Football Manager have turned people into wanting to see the big transfers

The arrival of Abramovich saw a club spending their owners millions on all players and the owner being ok to soak up all the losses - the authorities then brought in rules after seeing clubs spending way beyond their means

City and then PSG took to new levels and ignored the rules etc

We have fans throwing toys about because our owners don’t spend their own money , it’s pathetic and it’s a shame the sport is that way

But as for it being a close shop for a handful of clubs - well it’s been that way for 50 years

70’s to 80’s - Liverpool and Everton with the odd win from someone like Forest and Villa

90’s to 00’s - Man Utd and Arsenal with the odd Blackburn
00’s to 10’s - Chelsea and Man Utd

And since then City

 

[babylonsinger]

So the current model of whoever can throw the most money at a club and inflate costs beyond what others can afford is the best way of generating a competitive sporting league. Agree that we do not have the set up for a draft. Salary caps are a better option. Not sure what the issue is with Wasps and Worcester, they spent money they did not have to spend up to the cap. The cap is there to keep some parity in the league not to prevent heinous financial stupidity infortunately. Saracens cheated and were relegated. Can we see the same happening to City if found guilty. No system is foolproof to cheating but the mark of the system is how the cheats are punished.

My thought has always been one to stop wage and transfer inflation without causing massive upset. Set a salary cap of £500000.00 a week (£26 million a year) so it is high enough and have transfer fees set at the remaining salary on the contract with a max of a 5 year contract. That would top the transfer fee at £130 million but that would be for someone who was bought and sold on the same day. Most with a couple of years on teh contract could move for a more reasonable £50 million. All costs and agent fees are paid out of the transfer fee and not over and above.

Maybe those are not the ideal solutions but surely it is getting near time to put something in place to level the spending out across the top leagues so as it returns to being a sporting competition as opposed to being a financial one.

Personally with the PL among others a salary cap is simply shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. There should be far stronger rules enforced on who can own clubs but again how can the FA or Premier League set these with a straight face when they have let absolute clowns take over clubs like Leeds, Charlton and even my own club Cardiff and also turned a blind eye to tainted money being used to take over several other clubs. Also not a fan of restricting spending the same as I would be for any other organisation. Clubs like Brentford and Brighton offer alternative solutions to spending

Disagree with salary and spending limits - clubs poorly run will go to the wall like in any other industry

 

[fundy]

So the current model of whoever can throw the most money at a club and inflate costs beyond what others can afford is the best way of generating a competitive sporting league. Agree that we do not have the set up for a draft. Salary caps are a better option. Not sure what the issue is with Wasps and Worcester, they spent money they did not have to spend up to the cap. The cap is there to keep some parity in the league not to prevent heinous financial stupidity infortunately. Saracens cheated and were relegated. Can we see the same happening to City if found guilty. No system is foolproof to cheating but the mark of the system is how the cheats are punished.

My thought has always been one to stop wage and transfer inflation without causing massive upset. Set a salary cap of £500000.00 a week (£26 million a year) so it is high enough and have transfer fees set at the remaining salary on the contract with a max of a 5 year contract. That would top the transfer fee at £130 million but that would be for someone who was bought and sold on the same day. Most with a couple of years on teh contract could move for a more reasonable £50 million. All costs and agent fees are paid out of the transfer fee and not over and above.

Maybe those are not the ideal solutions but surely it is getting near time to put something in place to level the spending out across the top leagues so as it returns to being a sporting competition as opposed to being a financial one.

Almost like Leicester Tigers never broke the salary cap Greg

Not sure English rugby is the best advert for salary caps in high level sport!

 

[GB72]

Personally with the PL among others a salary cap is simply shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. There should be far stronger rules enforced on who can own clubs but again how can the FA or Premier League set these with a straight face when they have let absolute clowns take over clubs like Leeds, Charlton and even my own club Cardiff and also turned a blind eye to tainted money being used to take over several other clubs. Also not a fan of restricting spending the same as I would be for any other organisation. Clubs like Brentford and Brighton offer alternative solutions to spending

Disagree with salary and spending limits - clubs poorly run will go to the wall like in any other industry

My suggestion of spending limits was not to save clubs, there will always be financial stupidity. It would more be to stop the advantage of billionaires owning clubs. FFP does not really work nor give parity, limiting spending would though, as rugby has shown, it is not foolproof.

 

[GB72]

Almost like Leicester Tigers never broke the salary cap Greg

Not sure English rugby is the best advert for salary caps in high level sport!

Fair point though not to the same degree. What it did show though was, in Saracens case, that in sport the most money spent often wins and surely that stops it being a sport and moves it to a contest of wallet size. Admit I am talking idealistically and painting broad brush strokes but it does fascinate me how some sport is not really a sporting contest. Basically just one of those hypothetical debates I enjoy if it remains general and not partisan

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Harry Kane....

32 of his 54 goals were scored against...

San Marino
Albania
Bulgaria
Montenegro
Panama
Kosovo
Lithuania
Malta
Andorra
Nigeria
Scotland
Senegal
Slovenia

Add the 18 penalties...

Means he's scored 4 goals in decent games.....

 

[Pin-seeker]

Harry Kane....

32 of his 54 goals were scored against...

San Marino
Albania
Bulgaria
Montenegro
Panama
Kosovo
Lithuania
Malta
Andorra
Nigeria
Scotland
Senegal
Slovenia

Add the 18 penalties...

Means he's scored 4 goals in decent games.....

nothing new there,pretty much the same for other countries top scorers

 

[Slime]

Harry Kane....

32 of his 54 goals were scored against...

San Marino
Albania
Bulgaria
Montenegro
Panama
Kosovo
Lithuania
Malta
Andorra
Nigeria
Scotland
Senegal
Slovenia

Add the 18 penalties...

Means he's scored 4 goals in decent games.....

Ah, but if the 18 penalties were scored in the games against the teams you listed, that means he's scored 22 goals in decent games.
Which is it, or is it, as I suspect, somewhere in between?

 

[Rlburnside]

Harry Kane....

32 of his 54 goals were scored against...

San Marino
Albania
Bulgaria
Montenegro
Panama
Kosovo
Lithuania
Malta
Andorra
Nigeria
Scotland
Senegal
Slovenia

Add the 18 penalties...

Means he's scored 4 goals in decent games.....

You must be bored. what a daft post

 

[Pin-seeker]

Right now and for the last 12 years Liverpool have been working under a self sustaining model , the income it spends is the income the club generates -the owners aren’t dipping into their own pockets to fund anything

Now imo that’s now a club should be run but for some that’s not good enough because it doesn’t allow the club to spend hundreds of millions each season on players

The Prem is now global and the transfer window for some is more exciting the game , the likes of FIFA and Football Manager have turned people into wanting to see the big transfers

The arrival of Abramovich saw a club spending their owners millions on all players and the owner being ok to soak up all the losses - the authorities then brought in rules after seeing clubs spending way beyond their means

City and then PSG took to new levels and ignored the rules etc

We have fans throwing toys about because our owners don’t spend their own money , it’s pathetic and it’s a shame the sport is that way

But as for it being a close shop for a handful of clubs - well it’s been that way for 50 years

70’s to 80’s - Liverpool and Everton with the odd win from someone like Forest and Villa

90’s to 00’s - Man Utd and Arsenal with the odd Blackburn
00’s to 10’s - Chelsea and Man Utd

And since then City

Obviously the owners don’t agree,that’s why they’re looking for outside investment

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Ah, but if the 18 penalties were scored in the games against the teams you listed, that means he's scored 22 goals in decent games.
Which is it, or is it, as I suspect, somewhere in between?

You must be bored. what a daft post

It’s just a joke

 

[Pin-seeker]

It’s just a joke

 

[Orikoru]

Harry Kane....

32 of his 54 goals were scored against...

San Marino
Albania
Bulgaria
Montenegro
Panama
Kosovo
Lithuania
Malta
Andorra
Nigeria
Scotland
Senegal
Slovenia

Add the 18 penalties...

Means he's scored 4 goals in decent games.....

Who do you think Ronaldo, or Messi, or any other international striker scored their goals against?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Who do you think Ronaldo, or Messi, or any other international striker scored their goals against?

 

[backwoodsman]

Random question. Anyone know why Wales are shown as topping group D ? They & Croatia have both won one and drawn one, and Croatia have the better goal difference.
(Nice to see them there though).
And great result Scotland ...

 

[ColchesterFC]

Random question. Anyone know why Wales are shown as topping group D ? They & Croatia have both won one and drawn one, and Croatia have the better goal difference.
(Nice to see them there though).
And great result Scotland ...

It's done on head to head record first before goal difference. Wales drew 1-1 away in Croatia which at the minute means they're above them due to having the away draw. If Croatia beat Wales in Cardiff later in the group and they are still on the same points Croatia will be top on head to head record. If they draw 1-1 in Cardiff then the head to head record will be the same and so it will go to goal difference. Not sure what happens if it's a 2-2 draw in Cardiff but assume that Croatia would also be top in that instance.

 

[backwoodsman]

It's done on head to head record first before goal difference. Wales drew 1-1 away in Croatia which at the minute means they're above them due to having the away draw. If Croatia beat Wales in Cardiff later in the group and they are still on the same points Croatia will be top on head to head record. If they draw 1-1 in Cardiff then the head to head record will be the same and so it will go to goal difference. Not sure what happens if it's a 2-2 draw in Cardiff but assume that Croatia would also be top in that instance.

Nothing like making it easy then ...

 

[Orikoru]

It's done on head to head record first before goal difference. Wales drew 1-1 away in Croatia which at the minute means they're above them due to having the away draw. If Croatia beat Wales in Cardiff later in the group and they are still on the same points Croatia will be top on head to head record. If they draw 1-1 in Cardiff then the head to head record will be the same and so it will go to goal difference. Not sure what happens if it's a 2-2 draw in Cardiff but assume that Croatia would also be top in that instance.

I actually think head-to-head is a good way to do it, but I had no idea that drawing away from home meant anything in that respect. Especially when I thought 'away goals' had been eradicated as a thing.

 

[ColchesterFC]

I actually think head-to-head is a good way to do it, but I had no idea that drawing away from home meant anything in that respect. Especially when I thought 'away goals' had been eradicated as a thing.

I think it only means something if Wales win at home or draw 0-0 in the return fixture. A 1-1 draw at home would mean they have matching head to head records. Any other draw or a loss and Croatia would be above them. Wales are only ahead on head to head because the other fixture hasn't been played yet.